Connery, the Oscars and his Bond perfotmances
I'm just watching 'The Untouchables' on TV, for the first time in quite a while. Connery deservedly won an Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor in this movie. He brings a range of emotion to his performance as Jimmy Malone, giving even his co-star DeNiro a run for his money in the acting stakes. But this tour de force leaves me reflecting, again, on how Connery's performances as Bond were rated, relatively speaking. They were never recognised by the Academy. Does a comparison of Bond with Malone expose the narrow limitations of the OO7 role, indicating how Connery could never have showcased his range of acting skills in the Bond movies? I think the opposite. I think that when we see the range of which Connery was capable, in movies like 'The Hill', 'The Offence' and 'The Untouchables', we should appreciate all the more how his restraint as Bond was a fine actor's choice, a performance full of light nuance and subtle shifts in gear: genre-appropriate; never phoned in (except for in parts of YOLT, perhaps); a studied, underestimated exercise in consummate cool. As Charlie Higson once commented: forget 'The Untouchables'; Connery should have won an Oscar for his performances as Bond, period!
Critics and material I don't need. I haven't changed my act in 50 years.